Shipbucket

^ to translate, that means it has the correct 5 inch guns (provided they match those with the parts sheet, it's hard for me to tell on this monitor) but has the incorrect 3-inch guns. The correct gun is labeled as the "Mk 37" (just as Erik said) here.

Hi everyone.
Am coming back home right now after 5 hours of dyalisys.
@ erik_t:
I have checked the reference files and - ohps - it was my fault 'Cause I have read to fast.
Sorrry for this. Have changed the guns and hope everything is alright now.
The most reference files talking about the 8"/L54 Mk 42 and not Mk 16.
I have tried to get more "life" into the drawing, that's why I have checked my books
(Stefan Terzibaschitsch - every edition of his works) a lot of photos of the Forrrestal-Class,
the Essex-Class and all pics from the United States herself.
Other devices you can see in the drawing are parts every carrier needed and have them like
TACAN, IFF, ESM, ECM and surface search radar. Never I have told I'm the best or I'm the chosen one
in shipdrawings. All I want to do is to try to get a real look into this design and to discover more
details than all the pics we all known can do.

Greetings from Germany
-Michael-

_________________
My worklist:
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... f=5&t=2767

Such an improvement! If you can sort the scanty references out to draw the most plausible underwater hull, it's gonna earn you a full 10! And I know it needs to be only a "most plausible one" considering the rather controversial nature of this design and the scarcity of good sources on it!

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

and for that hull you only have to look at carriers hull build at that time to find out how it can probably have looked.

Oh. I am used to at guns in the 76mm 3" range are drawn black while 127mm or 5" or more are 3px+. but then I'm old fashioned

Yes, agree. Considering its overall appearance which is closer to the latter (and significantly smaller) Forrestals, than the immediate predecessors of the Midway-class, the underwater hull should follow those lines, but with adjustments to reflect that it's an earlier design. If I recall it correctly, her underwater hull was supposed to reflect certain battleship standards as used and incorporated into the Iowa- and Montana-classes, such as protection, armor belt (internal with bulges) I know Friedman in his US Carriers has a very informative elevation of the original design of the Forrestals, which was very close to the approved BuShips plans for the United States.

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

Wow, didn't realize those Mk 37s are bigger than the Mk 42s. Wonder why they didn't use a common housing at that point.

The underwater hull somewhat resembled the South Dakota, with large skegs on the outboard screws. All of the SPS-6 should be below the deck edge (and, if I remember correctly, in radomes).

Not sure what happened to the gun barrels - they should be 3px thick as mandated by the standards.

@ erik_t:
Am working all the time (the underwater hull is read to over 90%).
Am changing the gun barrels to the correct size with the next update. I've thinked they was to thick so I have given them a diet!!
Because of the AN/SPS 22 system: three antennas from the AN/SPS-6C system under radomes for the Forrestal-Class
planned as a flushdeck carrier first. I have searched for those radomes for the "United States" but I haved find nothing.
One of the model pics in the net shows four antennas without radomes in the same position I have drawed them.
I don't know where I should draw the aft radome. The problem are the 360 degree radiation.
Between the guns??

_________________
My worklist:
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... f=5&t=2767

It's very very late here (4:30 am) and I'm really tired now.

_________________
My worklist:
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... f=5&t=2767

You're going to want to save that last image as a PNG, but it looks good.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆